Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33045908›Full record

ArticleOtolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery2021

Olfactory Cleft Measurements and COVID-19-Related Anosmia.

Aytug Altundag, Duzgun Yıldırım, Deniz Esin Tekcan Sanli, Melih Cayonu, Sedat Giray Kandemirli, Ahmet Necati Sanli, Ozge Arici Duz, Ozlem Saatci

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06082193 (Olfactory Cleft Stenosis and Obstruction on Paranasal Sinus CT Scan in Pre Septo Rhinoplasty Patients Without Respiratory Mucosa Pathology), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT06082193 unknown statusnot on this mapstarted 2023, after this paper: background citation

Olfactory Cleft Stenosis and Obstruction on Paranasal Sinus CT Scan in Pre Septo Rhinoplasty Patients Without Respiratory Mucosa Pathology : Normal Variants or Pathologic Findings ?

TypeobservationalSponsorCentral Hospital, Nancy, FranceRan2023 to 2023Enrolled75ConditionsOlfactory Impairment
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Persistent COVID-19 parosmia and olfactory loss post olfactory training: randomized clinical trial comparing central and peripheral-acting therapeutics.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2024
    Trial
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Comparison Between Intranasal Insulin Films Alone and Combined Intranasal Insulin Plus Steroid Films for Post Viral Olfactory Dysfunction.Indian journal of otolaryngology and head and neck surgery : official publication of the Association of Otolaryngologists of India · 2025
    Article
  9. Changes in olfactory bulb volume and olfactory sulcus depth in COVID-19 infection: an autopsy study.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Prevalence and Factors Associated with Olfactory Dysfunction in Individuals with COVID-19 in Brazil: A Study of 20,669 Cases from 2020 to 2021.Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Neurological manifestation in COVID-19 disease with neuroimaging studies.American journal of neurodegenerative disease · 2023
    Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Aytug AltundagDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology, Medical Faculty, Biruni University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Duzgun YıldırımVocational School of Health, Mehmet Ali Aydınlar University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Deniz Esin Tekcan SanliDepartment of Radiology, Acibadem Kozyatagi Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.
Melih CayonuDepartment of Otorhinolaryngology and Head & NeckSurgery, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey.
Sedat Giray KandemirliDepartment of Radiology, University of Iowa, Iowa City, Iowa, USA.
Ahmet Necati SanliDepartment of General Surgery, Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty, Istanbul University-Cerrahpasa, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ozge Arici DuzDepartment of Neurology, Istanbul Medipol University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Ozlem SaatciDepartment of Ear, Nose, and Throat, Sancaktepe Training and Research Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the differences in olfactory cleft (OC) morphology in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) anosmia compared to control subjects and postviral anosmia related to infection other than severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). STUDY

designProspective.

settingThis study comprises 91 cases, including 24 cases with anosmia due to SARS-CoV-2, 38 patients with olfactory dysfunction (OD) due to viral infection other than SARS-CoV-2, and a control group of 29 normosmic cases.

methodsAll cases had paranasal sinus computed tomography (CT), and cases with OD had magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) dedicated to the olfactory nerve. The OC width and volumes were measured on CT, and T2-weighted signal intensity (SI), olfactory bulb volumes, and olfactory sulcus depths were assessed on MRI.

resultsThis study showed 3 major findings: the right and left OC widths were significantly wider in anosmic patients due to SARS-CoV-2 (group 1) or OD due to non-SARS-CoV-2 viral infection (group 2) when compared to healthy controls. OC volumes were significantly higher in group 1 or 2 than in healthy controls, and T2 SI of OC area was higher in groups 1 and 2 than in healthy controls. There was no significant difference in olfactory bulb volumes and olfactory sulcus depths on MRI among groups 1 and 2.

conclusionIn this study, patients with COVID-19 anosmia had higher OC widths and volumes compared to control subjects. In addition, there was higher T2 SI of the olfactory bulb in COVID-19 anosmia compared to control subjects, suggesting underlying inflammatory changes. There was a significant negative correlation between these morphological findings and threshold discrimination identification scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4.

Indexed as

AdultAnosmiaCase-Control StudiesCOVID-19FemaleHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMaleMiddle AgedNasal CavityOlfactory BulbOlfactory MucosaOrgan SizeProspective StudiesTomography, X-Ray ComputedanosmiaCOVID-19olfactory cleftSARS-CoV-2Sniffin’ Sticksvolumewidth

Identifiers

PMID33045908
PMCPMC7554408

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.